Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-17-2000 ARC Minutes SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES April 17, 2000 - 5:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Jennifer Metz, Jim Lopes, Mark Chandler, Rob Schultz, Mark Rawson, and Chairperson Charles Stevenson Absent: Commissioner Zeljka Howard Staff: Associate Planner Whitney McIlvaine, Associate Planner Peggy Mandeville PROJECTS: 1. 433 Pacific Street. ARC 1-00; Review of a proposed new 19-unit senior apartment project; R-4 zone; SLO Non-profit Housing Corp. applicant. Whitney McIlvaine, Associate Planner, presented the staff report recommending the Commission continue review with specific direction regarding building design, colors, materials, entries, setbacks, landscaping, and retaining walls, based on findings, and subject to conditions and code requirements, which she outlined. The public hearing was opened. Jeff Dillon, project architect, submitted a variation of building elevations. He used an overhead projector to explain the design process for the project and showed the previous layout proposals. He indicated that the costs of a third story are prohibitive. Comm. Lopes asked whether underground parking had been considered and whether it was feasible to lose one parking space. George Moylan stated that he was not sure yet exactly how this project will be financed. Miles English, a neighbor, objected to the size and design of the building and stated that this project is not compatible with the existing neighborhood. Steve Florie, 460 Pacific, San Luis Obispo, submitted pictures of the existing streetscape. He said that the building is too big, out of character and overly dense, looking like a warehouse. Mr. Florie said that he felt that Pacific Street would be a better location for a main entry. Miles English commented that he appreciates the elevation changes. Minutes ARC Meeting April 17, 2000 Page 2 Carol Johnson, 463 Pacific, said that the new elevations are encouraging. The public hearing was closed. COMMISSION COMMENTS Commr. Lopes commented that maximum density needed justification. He felt that the lounge is undersized and he would like a roof line plan. He felt the project needs edge molding at the intersection with other materials and noted that he prefers wood sills to stucco plant ons. He stated that he wants an overhang above the Carmel Street entrance. He supported 10 versus 11 parking spaces and the creation of additional outdoor space. Commr. Lopes does not support a trash enclosure so close to the street. He also suggested considering different trees. Commr. Metz said that the landscape planting is very linear and that it would be better to group some trees. She commented that it would be acceptable to lose a parking space, and that there should be an entrance on Pacific Street. Commr. Metz said that she likes the color scheme, but that the roof still looks massive. She stated that the density is satisfactory. Commr. Schultz stated that the density proposed might not be compatible with the neighborhood. He supported a larger lounge and additional storage. Commr. Rawson supported the density and stated that the elevation drawings exaggerate roof massing. He stated that he doesn’t have concerns regarding the lounge, and that turf block might be a good use for the one parking space. Commr. Chandler felt that he could support 10 versus 11 parking spaces and expansion of the lounge. He supported setback exceptions, and preferred the most recent elevation design. Commr. Stevenson appreciated the lower finish floor level, but would like more trim around windows. He stated that he wants rafters to be visible and referred to Land Use Element residential objectives. He mentioned that it would be good to provide an entry along Pacific Street. Commr. Stevenson said that this is infill development and in a neighborhood in transition. He felt the density is acceptable. He stated that he would like small outdoor seating areas, and that the roof will not appear so massive from the street. He mentioned that he likes the vents grouped in chimneys. Commr. Metz felt that the project needed larger plant material and more variety, and that perhaps there should be a 15-foot setback along Pacific. She also suggested that the project could lose 2 feet of landscape area at the rear of the building. On motion by Commr. Rawson, seconded by Commr. Metz, the ARC granted final approval of the project, based on the following findings and subject to the following Minutes ARC Meeting April 17, 2000 Page 3 conditions and code requirements: Findings 1. The project is exempt from environmental review under CEQA Section 15322 (Infill Development). 2. As conditioned, the project’s design is appropriate for the R-4 zone and will be compatible with surrounding development. 3. No public purpose would be served by requiring the full street yard setbacks. Conditions 1. Exterior lighting shall be directed downward and not spill onto adjoining properties. The maximum height of lighting equipment and supporting structures, including fixtures, standard and base, shall not be higher than 16 feet above the finished grade approved as part of this permit. Lighting levels measured at the finished grade directly beneath the fixture shall not exceed 10 foot-candles. The light source in exterior fixtures shall not be visible from off site. 2. A final landscaping and irrigation plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Department to the satisfaction of the City Arborist and the Community Development Director. The landscaping shall provide more substantial foundation planting, a greater variety of groundcover, shrubs, and trees, additional screening along the northerly property line, and standard tree wells along Pacific Street. Modify the planting in the Pacific Street yard to effectively reduce the size of the building through grouping the plants in a less linear pattern and using larger and more diverse plants. 3. Street yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 15 feet from Pacific Street and a minimum of 10 feet from Carmel Street, except that the trash enclosure may be set back a minimum of 3 feet. 4. Kitchen facilities shall be provided in the lounge area to include a sink, an under the counter refrigerator and a microwave. 5. The retaining wall along the northern property line shall either be on the property line or in the location of the existing fence. Where necessary fencing shall be constructed on top of the retaining wall to maintain the same amount of screening now provided by the existing fence. 6. Due to the potential for isolated historic burials within the project area, an archaeologist, qualified for identification of human remains, shall monitor grading and other construction excavation. In the event any remains are found, all Minutes ARC Meeting April 17, 2000 Page 4 construction activity shall stop until a mitigation and monitoring plan acceptable to the Community Development Director is developed. 7. The building design shall be modified as follows to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director: a. Rafters - : Size the exposed roof rafters so they will not disappear when gutters are installed. Rafters shall be constructed from 2” x 6” lumber with a scabbed on rafter tail to enhance the rafter depth. b. Horizontal detail – Provide a 14- inch horizontal band around the building where plans show the line of the second story floor. c. Lap Siding - Provide molding or a trim piece where lap siding is adjacent to a different material. Explore additional articulation to better separate the individual balconies where two are shown adjacent to each other. d. Storage - Provide common storage areas within the building in locations such as under the stairs. e. Entries – Explore the addition of an entry or entries along the Pacific Street elevation. f. Windows - Further articulate the windows by providing a more substantial wood sill and window trim; and incorporating details suggested by the th elevation drawing submitted at the April 17 meeting such as plant shelves and variations in window grids. g. Raised Planters - Provide a wall cap detail, preferably using a different material, like tile. h. Miscellaneous – Incorporate construction details to improve the residential character of the building as indicated on the elevation drawing submitted at th the April 17 meeting, including variation in balcony height and chimneys for the plumbing vents. Work with staff to ensure building plans provide continuity in terms of craftsman-style elements. 8. Consider eliminating the northeasterly parking space and replace it with turf block or additional landscaping and an adjoining patio area. 9. Incorporate small informal seating areas in the outdoor landscaping. 10. Provide additional articulation on the upper wall of the eastern elevation such as an 18-inch pop-out around the central window with a korbel return and a gable roof. 11. Explore expanding the interior dimension of the lounge. Minutes ARC Meeting April 17, 2000 Page 5 Code Requirements 1. One 15-gallon street tree shall be planted per 35 feet of frontage on both streets in accordance with City standards to the satisfaction of the City Arborist. 2. Water and wastewater impact fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of building permits. Both the water and the wastewater impact fees are charged on a “per unit” basis for residential projects. 3. Parking lot design must be consistent with City Parking and Driveway standards. 4. The project must comply with the California Fire Code to the satisfaction of the City Fire Chief. 5. The new sidewalk on Carmel Street shall be 2 meters wide and integral with the curb & gutter, in accordance with City Standard No. 4110. 6. The new driveway ramp on Carmel Street shall be constructed according to City Standard No. 2111. 7. The storm drain system shall be designed to accommodate upslope historical runoff which appears to drain onto this site. AYES: Commrs. Metz, Chandler, Rawson and Stevenson NOES: Commrs. Schultz and Lopes ABSENT: None The motion passed. Minutes ARC Meeting April 17, 2000 Page 6 2. 3440 South Higuera Street.. ARC 176-99; Review of one-story 12,700 square foot commercial service building next to a creek, and request for a creek setback exception; C-S-S zone; San Luis Creek Associates, applicant. Peggy Mandeville, Associate Planner, and Neil Havlik, Natural Resources Manager, presented the staff report recommending the Commission grant schematic approval to the project, approving the project’s site design and providing direction to the applicant regarding the building architecture, based on findings, and subject to conditions and code requirements, which were outlined. The Public Hearing was opened. Terry Orton, project applicant, described the project revisions. Commissioner Lopes asked about the driveway easement and parking provisions for extra parking. Commr. Schultz asked about elimination of parking at the corner. The Public Hearing was closed. COMMISSION COMMENTS Commr. Chandler said that he appreciated the applicant’s efforts. He stated that he would like softening between the street and parking with various heights. Commr. Rawson was supportive of the original project and had no objections to the new site plan. He stated that security is an issue and that he does not want parking behind the building. He said that since there is no pedestrian component, it is not as important to have the building next to the street. Commr. Rawson mentioned that the architecture is broken up and well articulated, and that he has no issues with the design. Commr. Schultz commented that he was at the previous meeting although not on the Commission at that time. He said that he has a hard time approving the setback exception. Commr. Schultz said that he likes the two buildings and that the project looks better than last time. He suggested that the project could reduce parking and increase square footage. Commr. Metz stated that she previously was in support of the project, but now felt that the columns are too narrow and have a soldier feeling. She said that she liked changes like Laguna Village Shopping Center has recently completed. Commr. Lopes supported the idea of a 2-story building with remainder as open space. Minutes ARC Meeting April 17, 2000 Page 7 He said he wanted a landscaped parkway, vertical and horizontal articulation of the building, changes in materials and colors and a building base consistent with the architectural style. He stated that he would like the tenant to be able to make exterior improvements. Commr. Stevenson said that he appreciated the applicant’s efforts, but that the project is over parked. He said that it is acceptable to widen tree wells in parking area, encourage second story on building at right, and he would like a wider sidewalk. On motion by Commr. Lopes, seconded by Commr. Stevenson, the ARC granted schematic approval of the project, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions and code requirements: Findings 1. The project is appropriate in this service-commercial setting will be compatible with surrounding development and will contribute to the quality of life in San Luis Obispo consistent with goals contained in the City’s Architectural Review Guidelines. 2. As conditioned, the project complies with the property development standards in the C-S zone. Conditions 1. A portion of the subject property is located in flood Zone “A”. The elevation of a 100-yr storm event is approximately 133’ (per City datum). The lowest finished floor must be constructed at or above the 134’ elevation. 2. The developer’s engineer shall submit a hydraulic analysis that evaluates the impacts of the proposed project on the existing flood zone, adjacent creek system and adjacent properties; any adverse impacts shall be mitigated to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. All creek improvements or modifications must be approved by the State Dept. of Fish & Game, the Army Corp of Engineers, the City’s Natural Resources Manager and the Director of Public Works. 3. The demolition of the existing service fruit stand triggers the Utilities Department Sewer Lateral Abandonment Policy. This policy states that the sewer lateral must be abandoned at the main prior to demolition unless the lateral is intended for reuse and it passes a video inspection. If the sewer lateral is intended for reuse, the owner shall submit a VHS video tape documenting the internal condition of the pipe. 4. The developer shall dedicate sufficient land across the Higuera Street frontage to provide a total right-of-way width of 29.3 m (96 feet). To achieve this right of way width requires dedication of an additional 3.7 m (12 feet) across the northerly 335 ft., more or less, of the project frontage, with a taper to meet the current right-of- way line near the proposed southerly driveway, as shown on the plans. A corner Minutes ARC Meeting April 17, 2000 Page 8 cut-off area at the intersection of Prado Road and Higuera Street shall also be included in the dedication to accommodate traffic signal equipment. 5. The developer shall install full frontage improvements (curbs, gutters, and sidewalks, and street trees) along the project’s Higuera St. frontage within the new right-of-way described above and shown on the plans. 6. The developer shall extend the street pavement on South Higuera to adjoin the newly established curb line as described above and shown on the plans and shall relocate and modify as needed the traffic signal facilities. 7. The developer shall be compensated for the additional right-of-way dedication on South Higuera, the cost of paving out the street, and the cost of relocating/modifying the traffic signal through Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) credits, revenues collected from Airport Area/Margarita Area developers, or some other acceptable mechanism. 8. The developer shall dedicate sufficient right-of-way across the project’s Prado Road frontage to establish a total right-of-way width of 29.3 m (96 feet). To achieve this ROW width shall require a dedication of an additional 3.7 m (12 feet) across the project’s frontage. This dedication shall taper to meet the current right- of-way dimension as shown on the plans. 9. The developer shall install full frontage improvements (curbs, gutters, and sidewalks, and street trees) along the project’s Prado Road frontage within the new right-of-way described above. Frontage improvements shall extend westward toward the bridge crossing San Luis Obispo Creek and shall terminate approximately 10 m (33 feet) from the eastern end of the bridge. 10. The developer shall expand the street pavement on Prado Road to adjoin the newly established curb line as described above and shown on the plans. 11. The developer shall be compensated for the additional right-of-way dedication on Prado Road, the cost of paving out the street, through Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) credits, revenues collected from Airport Area/Margarita Area developers, or some other acceptable mechanism. 12. The developer shall grant an easement that extends from the creek to the Prado- South Higuera Street intersection to enable the proposed bike path to connect to the intersection, location to the approval of the Director of Public Works. 13. Both short- and long-term bicycle parking shall be provided consistent with Section 17.16.060, Table 6.5 of the Zoning Regulations. The location of short-term bicycle parking (racks) shall be consistent with criteria included within the adopted Bicycle Transportation Plan (1993): short-term bicycle parking (racks) shall be located in close proximity to the main entryways to the proposed structures. Long-term Minutes ARC Meeting April 17, 2000 Page 9 bicycle parking shall be provided through the installation of bicycle lockers or the provision of a fully enclosed lockable room(s) within the structure reserved for bicycle storage. 14. Drainage conveyed into the creek shall be designed to avoid excessive erosion and water quality contamination. 15. The areas adjacent to the creeks (as delineated on the City's Flood Insurance Rate Maps) are "B" flood zones and shall be shown on the final plans. Any improvements within the "B" flood zones shall have the finished floor elevations "at least one foot above the adjacent grade". If the hydraulic analysis results in greater depths of flooding during a 100- yr. storm, the Director of Public Works will require finished floors to be raised to 1 ft. above the calculated 100-yr storm level. 16. Any necessary clearing of existing creek and drainage channels, including tree pruning or removals, and any necessary erosion repairs shall be to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works, the Natural Resources Manager, Army Corp of Engineers and the Dept. of Fish & Game. Final plans for architectural review shall accurately show all riparian vegetation to be removed and the area proposed for its replacement. 17. The developer shall submit a creek preservation/restoration plan for review and approval by the Director of Public Works and the Natural Resources Manager. This plan shall be implemented and inspected by the Natural Resources Manager prior to the start of any clearing or grading of the site. A site restoration agreement and bond/guarantee may be required prior to the start of any work or during the course of this project, at the discretion of the Natural Resources Manager. Prior to the start of any work, all protective measures identified on the preservation plan shall be installed and inspected the Natural Resources Manager shall inspect the site and all any areas identified as areas requiring protection on said plan shall be protected. 18. Required parking shall be provided in accordance with use permit approval for this site. Additionally, the property owner shall be responsible for providing a running total of the site’s parking requirements and allocations with the submittal of any Planning or Building permits for tenant improvements. 19. Mechanical equipment shall be roof mounted and screened from view with parapet walls. 20. All mitigation measures associated with ER 176-99 shall apply to this project. These mitigation measures include but are not limited to the requirement for oil and sand separators at each drain inlet, steps to follow if archaeological resources are found during construction, the preparation of a creek stabilization/riparian restoration habitat plan, and the requirement for on-site recycling. Minutes ARC Meeting April 17, 2000 Page 10 21. The use of exterior loud speakers, telephone bells, music or similar devices shall be prohibited due to the sites proximity to the creek. 22. Each use shall require approval of an administrative use permit in accordance with the Special Considerations Overlay zone. 23. The color and materials of the trash enclosure shall be compatible with the building architecture. Further, decorative solid metal doors shall be used on the trash enclosure gates given their visibility from the street. 24. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a plan illustrating truck delivery rotes that do no block circulation to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Community Development Director. If conflicts arise, delivery hours or the size of delivery trucks may be restricted. 25. To reduce potential negative impacts to the creek and associated riparian habitat, no activities (other than walking of sitting) or storage shall take place between the rear of the buildings/parking areas and the creek. 26. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall receive Community Development Department approval of a master sign program for the center with individual letters used for wall signs in lieu of cabinet signs. Said sign program shall comply with the City’s Sign Regulations. 27. Final building architecture shall return to the Commission for review and approval. The building architecture shall be revised as follows: a. Encourage the inclusion of a second story component in Building 2; b. provide vertical and horizontal building articulation; c. provide changes to the building materials and colors; d. provide a building base, middle and top, and use the architectural style consistently within each building. 28. The following items shall return to staff for review and approval as part of the building permit plan check process: a. Updated landscape plan using new site design which indicate berming and additional plant materials (including vines) along the project’s street frontage to screen the parking lot, landscaping along the southern property line, split rail fencing along the creek setback, riparian planting in the vicinity of the creek, and additional trees shall be planted within the parking area. b. A site lighting plan, including photometrics, and parking lot standards that are a maximum of 20 feet in height from ground to top of fixture, and fixtures with down-type lights and shields (maximum illumination levels at the ground below the lighting fixtures shall not exceed 10 luxes at ground level under the Minutes ARC Meeting April 17, 2000 Page 11 fixture and 3 luxes in the vicinity of the creek. 29. Explore the feasibility of a five-foot wide parkway between the curb and sidewalk and increase the size of the landscape planters within the parking lot. Code Requirements 1. Street trees are required to be planted per City Standards. 2. Traffic impact fees are required to be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. 3. Water and wastewater impact fees shall be paid at the time building permits are issued. Both fees are based on the size of the water meter serving the property. 4. A water allocation is required, due to the new buildings. Currently, a water allocation can only be obtained through the water retrofit program. The City’s Water Conservation division can help in determining the needed allocation and the necessary number of retrofits. The cost of retrofitting is directly credited against the project’s Water Impact Fees, at a rate of $150 per bathroom retrofitted. 5. Appropriate backflow prevention will be necessary on any connection to the City water system, since the property includes an active well. Well water can be used to offset that portion of the projects water allocation that would be attributable to irrigation. If well water is to be used for domestic purposes, the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City and provide the facilities needed to meter the well water usage in accordance with City policies and standards. This is necessary to appropriately bill the owner for sewage collection and treatment. 6. Depending on the tenants and proposed activities of the new development, industrial waste/wastewater pretreatment requirements may apply. These requirements shall be determined by the City’s Industrial Waste Coordinator, Dale Karnes, who can be reached at 781-7425. AYES: Commrs. Rawson, Stevenson, Chandler, Schultz, Metz and Lopes. NOES: None ABSENT: Commr. Howard The motion passed. 3. 1720 Johnson Avenue, ARC 4-99; Review of the demolition of existing bungalows and construction of 8 new residences and one apartment on a historic site; R-2 zone; Steve Sicanoff, applicant. Minutes ARC Meeting April 17, 2000 Page 12 Peggy Mandeville, Associate Planner, presented the staff report recommending the Commission grant final approval to the project based on findings and subject to conditions and code requirements, which she outlined. The Public Hearing was opened. Thomas Brajkovich said that this was his second time before the ARC and he described revisions. Commr. Metz asked about the conflict between grading plan showing plant removals and the landscaping plan, which does not show removals. The Public Hearing was closed. COMMISSION COMMENTS Commr. Rawson said that this is a nice project, the changes made are well-handled, and he would support final approval. Commr. Schultz stated that this is a wonderful project, but Unit 8 is of concern; possibly downsize for less impact. Commr. Metz commented that this is a nice project, and she wanted to call attention to replacement planting if planting is lost. Blending contours is preferred; she recommended contour grading where possible. Screening will be important. Commr. Rawson recommended the ARC grant final approval. Motion failed. Commr. Lopes suggested continuation of review of the project with direction. Do elevation first (include building color) Commr. Lopes suggested that the retaining wall be decorative in design and asked for an explanation as to how far back the retaining walls are located, and whether there is room to step them back. He also said that Unit 8 has lots of noise impacts and asked if the applicant would be willing to have an air conditioner for Unit 8. Commr. Metz asked if the oak tree is to be removed or stay. Plans show both. Commr. Lopes said that he likes the architecture except Unit 8, which shows flat side to street and suggested that the gable could be hipped. He liked the idea of a stepped second floor or possibly reorient Unit 8. Unit 8 is the most visible unit on the most crowded part of project and should be eliminated or redesigned. He said that he would like the use of mechanical ventilation in Unit 8 if it stays. Minutes ARC Meeting April 17, 2000 Page 13 Commr. Chandler proposed a square footage for Unit 8 at 1400 square feet. He thought the unit was an imposing structure given its height so close to the sidewalk. He said he was in favor of trying to shift the unit or reduce its square footage in lieu of eliminating it. He does not want to eliminate existing planting next to Johnson Avenue, and suggested that the applicant produce an elevation from Johnson Avenue which identifies and addresses the visual impacts. Commr. Chandler also wants the design to eliminate as much fill as possible. Commr. Stevenson said the applicant did a great project keeping the theme and history of the existing development. He stated that fieldstone should be used for the retaining wall. He is concerned about the imposing elevation and is doubtful that a reduction in size will accomplish the goal. He mentioned traffic safety and suggested consideration of an electric gate one-half way between the site with existing residents using Johnson Avenue and new residents using Fixlini for access. He also said that he liked the Commissioners' suggestions for Unit 8. Larry Versaw, applicant’s engineer, stated that there are 5 existing residential units now. On motion by Commr. Lopes, seconded by Commr. Chandler, the ARC continued consideration of the project to a date uncertain, with the following direction: 1. Provide a colored streetscape view of the project from Johnson Avenue to illustrate how the project will be viewed from Johnson Avenue. 2. Submit revised grading and landscaping plans that consistently show the elimination of fill in front of the site and retention of major plants in the Johnson Street frontage showing the wooded area to remain or provide a detailed landscaping and grading plan of the proposed design. 3. Provide an inventory of the site’s existing landscaping along Johnson Avenue specifically noting each plant proposed for removal. 4. Provide a different design for Unit 8. Consider reorienting the building further from the street, reducing its size, stepping back the second story, using a hip roof, or redesigning the unit as a single story building. 5. Address the suggestion of relocating the driveway gate to the middle of the property which would result in the new tenants not having access to the Johnson Street driveway. 6. Provide a detail of the proposed walls showing the incorporation of a stone veneer similar to the material used in the existing residence. 7. Address the suggestion of incorporating a mechanical ventilation system in Unit 8. Minutes ARC Meeting April 17, 2000 Page 14 AYES: Commrs. Chandler, Rawson, Stevenson, Schultz, Metz and Lopes NOES: None ABSENT: Commr. Howard The motion passed. 4. 254 Santa Rosa Street; ARC 32-00; Review of proposed service station and convenience store; C-T zone; Jim Pfeil and Tom Murrell, applicants. Peggy Mandeville, Associate Planner, presented the staff report recommending the Commission grant final approval to the project, based on findings, and subject to conditions and code requirements, which she outlined. The Public Hearing was opened. George Garcia, project representative, described the project. Commr. Lopes asked about color choices, tile, the storefront, and cornice. Commr. Stevenson asked about depth of roof element. The Public Hearing was closed. COMMISSION COMMENTS Commr. Metz said this is the nicest ARCO station she had ever seen. Commr. Lopes commented on screening the shed on the adjacent Shell property, and consideration of the idea of outdoor seating. He was satisfied with the architect's description/purpose of the proposed checkerboard pattern. Commr. Chandler suggested an increase in the depth of the roof structure and landscaping wherever possible. He said that the project looks great, and that a couple of outdoor tables could be added. Commr. Rawson said that this project is an excellent example of what can be done. Commr. Stevenson thanked the architect for the background and design thought process he provided the Commission. Commr. Schultz asked about circulation and possible idea of a bench. Commr. Lopez asked if the project sign could be inset into the parapet wall. Minutes ARC Meeting April 17, 2000 Page 15 On motion by Commr. Rawson, seconded by Commr. Metz, the ARC granted approval of the project, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions and code requirements: Findings 1. The project is appropriate in this tourist commercial setting, will be compatible with surrounding development and will contribute to the quality of life in San Luis Obispo consistent with goals contained in the City’s Architectural Review Guidelines. 2. As conditioned, the project complies with the property development standards in the C-T zone. Conditions 1. The following revisions shall be made to the submitted landscape plan: a. Where feasible, include trees within the side yard planters; b. Provide for complete plant coverage of landscape planters with a combination of a variety of trees, shrubs and groundcovers and screening of the adjacent shed; c. Include some larger growing shrubs or vines within the side yard planters to help screen the existing yard fences; d. Include some larger growing shrubs within the street yard planters to provide better parking lot screening (a min. 36 inch high screen is required through the use of mounding and/or plant materials). 2. Lighting shall be directed downward and not spill onto adjoining properties. The maximum height of lighting equipment and supporting structures, including fixture(s), standards, and base, shall be no higher than 20 feet above the finished grade approved as part of this permit. Lighting levels measured at the finished grade directly beneath the fixture shall not exceed 10 footcandles. 3. All mechanical equipment shall be screened from view from the public right of way through the use of parapet walls, screen walls and/or landscape materials complimentary to the building design to the approval of the Community Development Director prior to the issuance of a building permit. 4. Bollards in front of the air/water dispenser shall be designed to be complimentary to the building architecture. 5. Final location of the monument sign shall be approved by the Community Development Director to ensure it does not interfere with visibility required for safe vehicular and pedestrian circulation. Minutes ARC Meeting April 17, 2000 Page 16 6. Driveway Construction/Reconstruction. The project’s Santa Rosa Street driveways (the new drive and the one replaced with sidewalk) shall be constructed or reconstructed in such a way as to provide a 1.2 meter (4 foot) wide asphalt bicycle lane, with no intruding surface seams, adjacent to the curb. (Note: this construction technique is consistent with that employed along this segment of Santa Rosa Street.) 7. The demolition of the existing service station should have triggered the Utilities Department Sewer Lateral Abandonment Policy. This policy states that the sewer lateral must be abandoned at the main prior to demolition unless the lateral is intended for reuse and it passes a video inspection. If the sewer lateral has not been previously abandoned, it shall be as a part of this project. If the lateral still exists and is intended for reuse, the owner can submit a VHS video tape documenting the internal condition of the pipe to the Utilities Department for approval. 8. Consider recessing the project’s wall design into the building parapet. Code Requirements 1. A water allocation may be required, due to the additional demand on the City’s water supplies. Currently, a water allocation can only be obtained through the water retrofit program. The City’s Water Conservation division can help in determining the needed allocation and the necessary number of retrofits. Water Conservation can be reached by calling 781-7258. The cost of retrofitting is directly credited against the project’s Water Impact Fees, at a rate of $150 per bathroom retrofitted. 2. Water and Wastewater Impact Fees shall be paid at the time building permits are issued. Both the Water and the Wastewater Impact Fees are based on the size of the water meter serving the property, with appropriate credits given for previous service. 3. Appropriate backflow prevention will be necessary on any connection to the City water system, due to the type of uses, the existence of the monitoring wells and the history of contamination at the site. The site plan shows the use of a PIV and FDC. Instead, the fire lateral shall have a USC approved backflow prevention device placed adjacent to the public right-of-way. The FDC shall be placed in accordance with Fire Department requirements. 4. Some industrial waste/wastewater pretreatment requirements will apply. The project shall be coordinated with the City’s Industrial Waste Coordinator, Dale Karnes, who can be reached at 781-7425. 5. Fire Department Access: Access shall be in accordance with Article 9 of the California Fire Code. Access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet. Access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the Minutes ARC Meeting April 17, 2000 Page 17 imposed loads of a 60,000 pound fire apparatus and shall be provided with a surface so as to provide all-weather driving capabilities. Existing access from Santa Rosa and Oak Street is adequate. 6. Water Supplies: Water supplies shall be in accordance with Sections 901 and 903 of the California Fire Code. An approved water supply connected to the City distribution system and capable of providing the required fire flow for fire protection is required. The fire flow shall be determining using Appendix III-A of the California Fire Code. 7. Fire Hydrants: Fire hydrants shall be installed in accordance with Section 903.4 of the California Fire Code. The location, number and type of hydrants connected to the City system shall be determined using Appendix III-B of the California Fire Code and the approved City Engineering Standards. Project will require the installation of a fire hydrant on the corner of Santa Rosa and Oak Street. 8. Fire Protection Systems and Equipment: Fire protection systems shall be in accordance with the California Fire Code and California Building Code as amended by the City. The island canopy will require the installation of fire sprinklers. Precise location of all fire protection equipment (FDC, DDCV, control valves…) shall be coordinated with and approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. 9. Fire Safety During Construction: Buildings undergoing construction, alteration or demolition shall be in accordance with Article 87 of the California Fire Code. 10. Site Remediation Status: Applicant shall provide the Fire Department with verification from the Regional Water Quality Control Board that the site is now available for development. 11. Street trees shall be required per City standards. Species shall be to the satisfaction of the City Arborist. 12. Applicable State and City permits will be reviewed for sidewalk/driveway replacements. AYES: Commrs. Rawson, Stevenson, Chandler, Schultz, Metz, Lopes NOES: None ABSENT: Commr. Howard The motion passed. The meeting adjourned at 9:55 p.m. to a regular meeting of the Architectural Review Commission, scheduled for Monday, May 1, 2000, at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room at City Hall, 990 Palm Street. Respectfully submitted, Minutes ARC Meeting April 17, 2000 Page 18 Peggy Mandeville, and Whitney McIlvaine Recording Secretaries